part of a project on Habermas and transnationalism
Ignoring of international law—“with impunity,” they say—commonly has no consequences for “sovereigns.” We easily idealize a common commitment to law, but how to make it binding is anyone’s guess. (March 15, 2014: You, too, can become Russian).
A few days ago, I came across two books on international law that seemed very relevant. Their titles are the basis of my subject line (but not the “high school” part—which has a serious side to it). I came across the titles because I was thinking about the Syria Event, whose parameters have changed significantly in recent days. My interest is also to think about the nature of international law, in light of the Syria Event (but I’m no specialist on law).
But who cares about the common impotence of international law? The Syrians do, certainly (glad). Allies of the Syrians care. Regional neighbors with their own agendas care (not glad). And investors who want global market stability care (not glad). Oh!: And soft-hearted humanitarians with free time to feel desperate sympathy for tragic violations of human rights. But the latter doesn’t (1) sell; nor (2) terribly bother regional neighbors with their own agendas. The bottom line easily seems to be...The Bottom Line.
I want to recycle a favorite quote from Habermas: the closing paragraphs of JH’s lecture “The Idea of the University,” 1986 (citation follows the quote). Here I’m splitting apart the passage from that lecture and numbering the parts, for the sake of later reference.
This is basically one continuous passage—one continuous period of his presentation—from his lecture. But I’ve edited out some short parts in order to emphasize a sense of the progressive practicality of higher education which philosophy after metaphysicalism may serve. An implicit ethos for me is that the efficacy of higher education (with its research enterprises) leads prospects for generalized Good (human development, healthy regions, ethical industrial development, political ethics, sustainable planet, etc.).
Habermas highlights 14 aspects...
I’m enchanted by trying to make unusual relations fruitful. I happened across a graduate student of ethnomusicology who expressed interest in Habermas, but who disappeared before I got a chance to appreciate his interest. So, I’m prospecting a connection myself: philosophy and anthropology; easy. Anthropology and ethnomusicology; of course. Philosophy and ethnomusicology might be an area of theoretical cultural anthropology. Altogether, this makes a normal context of interdisciplinary studies, a topic in communion between field-level human sciences and conceptual humanities.
part of Habermas and the EU
This is ultimately about the problem of EU integration from the German point of view.
Since it’s the middle of an election season in Germany, it would seem unlikely that there’s such a singularity as “the” German point of view on Europe. But all of Germany and all of Europe can agree that there is the German Question in all talk of EU prosperity. Andrea Kluth (Berlin bureau chief for The Economist) explicates it brilliantly. This is must reading:
“The dilemma at the heart of Europe: Germany and the German Question”
[If that original link becomes invalid, Kluth’s essay can be found here.]
part of projects on Habermas and the EU and transnationalism
A recent paper, “Trans-National Democratic Innovation in the European Union: Flirting with Deliberative and Plebiscitry Design,” is very relevant to thinking about Habermas’s interest in EU transnationalism. The U.S. correlate would be a matter of trans-state innovation in federalism. Can each learn from the other?
I don’t recall that Habermas gives attention to the European Citizens’ Initiative, which the linked paper above (from the Aug. 2013 Americal Political Science Associsation conference) discusses.
What can thinking about that initiative do for American interest in more deliberative processes in society?
Last February, Habermas responded very accessibly to questions on “discourse theory and international law,”...
• followed by an analysis in March 2013 of the problem of “Bringing the Integration of Citizens into line with the Integration of States,”...
• which unwittingly provides a good background and complement to his April 2013 Leuven lecture, “Democracy, Solidarity and the European Crisis.”
Altogether, these provides good context for assessing what may (or may not) be exemplary about EU problems for general thinking—as one also dwells at length with Habermas’s Athens lecture later? This lecture, by the way, became the subject for a symposium, which I linked to, as part of a project on transnationalism.
part of Habermas studies
Teleological action is a basic kind of action in Habermas's theory. This is commonly not appreciated because his critique of instrumentalism has been so important to his work. Yet, all action has purposive aspects, and communicative action commonly serves large scale purposes. In On the Pragmatics of Communication (OPC), he writes (in a footnote):
Communicative action is always embedded in the teleological action contexts of the individuals respectively participating in it. (213)
